MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380610522 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25016

Mechanistic block‐based attention mechanism stacked autoencoder for describing typical unit connection industrial processes and their monitoring

2023· article· en· W4380610522 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chenhao Wang, Xujia Tang, Jianbo Yu, Xiaofeng Yang, Xuefeng Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBlock (permutation group theory)AutoencoderProcess (computing)Focus (optics)Computer scienceFault (geology)Limit (mathematics)Feature (linguistics)Artificial intelligenceFault detection and isolationConnection (principal bundle)Data miningAlgorithmEngineeringMathematicsArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The overall information of a process can be obtained through global modelling, and the local information is easily ignored in the research of the industrial process monitoring of unit connection. Thus, finding the global type of faults is easy, but occurs at the expense of drowning out the local faults. The use of block modelling can highlight local information, thereby improving local fault detection capability. However, the connection information between blocks is usually ignored in block modelling, which makes finding fault classes that only affect the connection relationship between blocks difficult. A mechanistic block‐based attention mechanism stacked autoencoder (MB‐AMSAE) monitoring method is proposed in this paper. The industrial process is divided into several parts in accordance with its mechanistic relationships, and each part represents an independent block. Self‐attention is used to focus on the information of each block itself. Cross‐attention is adopted to focus on the information between blocks, and this information is fused to form new blocks. The new block is used as the feature of the original block, and the original block is reconstructed by using a stacked autoencoder. The corresponding control limit is obtained in accordance with the reconstruction ability of normal samples, and whether the working conditions are normal is judged according to the control limit. The proposed algorithm is used in numerical simulation, Tennessee‐Eastman processes, and is compared with other advanced algorithms based on its fault detection capability. Results show the effectiveness of the MB‐AMSAE algorithm in process monitoring.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.603
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.170 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207